Disclaimer: the posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.

Sunday, September 01, 2013

'CIA'S BANDAR SUPPLIED GAS FOR DAMASCUS ATTACK'

Prince Bandar, who is reported to be behind the gas attack in Syria. Rumsfeld on the left.

'The rebel group al-Nusra, which is linked to al-Qaeda, did the gas attack in Damascus, using gas supplied by Prince Bandar of Saudi Arabia.'

A group of journalists, one of whom works for the Associated press, report that both rebels and local residents in Ghouta accuse Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan of providing the chemical weapons to the al-Qaida linked rebel group.

"My son came to me two weeks ago asking what I thought the weapons were that he had been asked to carry," said Abu Abdel-Moneim, the father of a rebel fighting to unseat Assad, who lives in Ghouta.Abdel-Moneim said his son and 12 other rebels were killed inside of a tunnel used to store weapons provided by a Saudi militant, known as Abu Ayesha, who was leading a fighting battalion. The father described the weapons as having a "tube-like structure" while others were like a "huge gas bottle."Ghouta townspeople said the rebels were using mosques and private houses to sleep while storing their weapons in tunnels.Abdel-Moneim said his son and the others died during the chemical weapons attack. That same day, the militant group Jabhat al-Nusra, which is linked to al-Qaida, announced that it would similarly attack civilians in the Assad regime’s heartland of Latakia on Syria’s western coast, in purported retaliation.

"The early 1970s brought Saudis recruited by the CIA to train at American military bases, including Prince Bandar bin Sultan.

"Bandar has long been an ally, if not an asset, of the CIA.

"When DCI William Casey wanted a cell of alleged terrorists killed, King Fahd sent Bandar to Langley to make the arrangements. The plan backfired when the subsequent car bombing took down an apartment building near Beirut, killing 80 innocent civilians.

"After September 11, 2001, Bandar would fall under suspicion when it was discovered that two of the terrorists involved were found to have received financing from the Prince.

According to Wikipedia, Bandar helped negotiate the 1985 Al Yamamah deal, a series of massive arms sales by the United Kingdom to Saudi Arabia worth GB£40 billion (US$80 billion), including the sale of more than 100 warplanes.

After the deal was signed, British arms manufacturer British Aerospace (now BAE Systems) allegedly funnelled secret payments of at least GB£1 billion (US$2 billion) into two Saudi embassy accounts in Washington, in yearly instalments of up to GB£120 million (US$240 million) over at least 10 years.

Bandar allegedly took money for personal use out of the accounts, as the purpose of one of the accounts was to pay the operating expenses of the prince's private Airbus A340.

According to investigators, there was "no distinction between the accounts of the embassy, or official government accounts [...], and the accounts of the royal family."

Aang, I get the sense that there's something not quite right about this 'mint' report. Not the Bandar bit, that's fine, as far as it goes, but the oops, it might have been an 'accident' bit. Is this being set up as a secondary back-stop in case their attempt to railroad a 'limited, surgical strike' fails?

Honestly, if you view the Sauds as crypto-Jews then all their behaviour makes perfect sense: always in league with Israel; always working to the detriment of Muslims worldwide; monopolist money pigs; perfectly corrupt (with alcohol, drugs, and prostitutes) as soon as they're away from any Muslim public eye; and not forgetting them as a variety of chosen-by-God, which is to say, royalty. Same thing really.

I'm thinking that to discuss them as Muslim or as Arab is a variety of misleading, one they're well aware of and in fact the point of the exercise. Think about it, they live lives of perfect luxury and privilege knowing full well that all their sins will be attributed to those they secretly hate, the true Muslims of the world.

Honestly, under the rubric of 'haters of Muslims' they make far more sense than any other thing. As haters their task is to cast real Muslims in the worst light possible. Thus it would pay for them to behave as abysmally as possible. And they do.

None of this should come as any great surprise. Think of Frank Collin/Cohen and Bill White/Weiss misrepresenting National Socialists. Think of Adam Pearlman/Adam Gadahn/Azzam al Amriki and Joseph Cohen/Yusuf Khattab misrepresenting Muslims as mad outlaws. And finally think of Sasher Baron Cohen misrepresenting um... let's just say, 'the whole of the goyim world'.

And Cohen does so safe in the knowledge that every racist, sexist, stupid, ill-mannered, homosexual arsehole he plays will taken less as an expression of a Jewish mindset than one of whomever it is he's pretending to be. It's a neat trick really.

The only difference between these small-time johnny-come-latelies and the Sauds is that the Sauds have been doing it for longer and with more success.

But really it's the same old trick and we see it over and over. Of course if you know what the trick is it becomes really quite obvious. And for mine, that's what the Sauds are. Obvious.

THE RUSSIAN POSITION ON THE CHEMICAL ATTACK http://www.alhadathnews.net/archives/95275

This article has been taken from Al-Hadath News and translated from Arabic. 23 August 2013

A Syrian diplomatic source revealed that the high-level Russian delegation made a clear statement coupled with solid documentation about the massacre that targeted East Gouta and this “silenced everyone and made them rethink their positions.”

The source, who preferred anonymity, in an interview,states that the official story about the Syrian massacre confirmed that militants fired two rockets loaded with chemicals from the area always in Rural Damascus, under the control of insurgents. Images of Russian satellites confirmed the story.

The source pointed out, in this connection, that the Russian position was, unusually, the most radical of the positions of European countries and even the U.S. position regarding the need to investigate the massacre, explained, “The Russian position was based on satellite images, The images illustrate and definitively that the militants are those who used chemical weapons. “

About the motivation of the opposition militants to commit this massacre, the source added that “a militant faction apparently wanted to exploit the presence of the Commission of Inquiry to increase shuffling papers, in collaboration with one of the Arab countries, without informing Western countries on such a step, they fired the rockets.”

The source cited accurately Syrian story about the failure of Member States to request images of U.S. satellites, as usual in the previous cases, the Russian-sufficiency pictures, which apparently it was “identical with the image of America to form the definitive document no doubt about it.”

The source believed that this massacre will have a major political impact on the position of the countries supporting the insurgency, led by France, which will re-evaluate its position, especially since this crime occurred without informing in advance their intelligence services, putting them in a critical position.

The source said that a “radical” opposition faction was to one who fired the chemical rockets and it was working under the command of a Gulf Arab state, that the source did not want to identify. While Saudi Arabia is the biggest supporter of the armed opposition and particularly the radical militants in its midst.A very fragile statement was issued by the UN Security Council, where the Council did not accuse directly the regime in Syria of being the perpetrator. Contrary to the opinion of the European countries that started from the first day a campaign to accuse the regime, but the Council called for a report that leads to define responsibilities and those who stand behind what happened.

There are witnesses reporting that in the night of the 21st to 22nd of August more than 30 ambulances were transporting injured Syrian soldiers from Eastern Goutta to the Mezzeh hospital. They were victims of sudden chemical attack from the armed opposition. More then 50 officers and soldiers were severely injured. But the authorities did not want to mention to keep high the moral of the troops.

did anyone else catch that BBC News 24 report on a syrian military phosphor bomb attack on innocent people this morning 31.8.2013?surely that's gold for the BBC's propaganda machine?there was a BBC news crew there directly under the bomb to catch it all on film for the massesand they seemed to know exactly where it came from and who fired it too fortunately ;)not seen it since

@Brian 1:52pm. Just as well Bandar is apparently made of teflon then. But I'm still not buying all the details in this story. It fails to explain or account for too many other details which would seem to imply forward planning and implicate others, like the videos and when and by whom they were uploaded, like Kerry's statements and when he made them, like the 'intercepts' http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2013/08/the-troodos-conundrum/